quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I dont know what she said, she (whoever she is) might be a war hero/inelligence guy/cook like you/

most modern 9s dont carry that. Thats add on.

The only guys that carried 9s when I was in was Krepo and guys getting RIffed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I understand where you are coming from.
However that will not work for most people.
Sometimes I carry a Peacemaker clone, single action (that means that you have to cock it each time you fire) and should be carried with 5 rounds. If I am attacked by one person that should be pleanty. However sometimes I carry a double action (that means all you have to do is pull the trigger for each shot) with a ten rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber for a total of 11. If there are more than one attacker it is better.
Tell me, how scary do you find a gun in the hand of someone protecting you, how much to you want their ability to reload hampered? How many bullets do you want that person to have. The number of bullets in your gun don't really matter when you have your victims cowered in a corner and you can pick them off a leasure. Remember he had something like 3 hours, it isn't like he walked in with some syfi ray gun and vaporized everyone.
In a situation like this you would find my firearm to be the most comforting and beautiful thing in the world.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Now they are reporting as many as 50 dead... I am just waiting for one of our gun friends to pop in and say... see if someone had a gun this would not have happened... they may be right.

But this happened in a gun happy stand your ground state... Lets see how this terrorist got his guns and ammo.

Butch

Regardless of how happy a gun state it is, it's illigal to take a concealed gun into a place that serves alcohol. A bar is basically a gun free zone. But, your one size fits all statement sounded good.

No. I know Missouri allows concealed carry if you are not intoxicated. I am sure a few other states allow concealed carry as long as you are not drinking.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I understand where you are coming from.
However that will not work for most people.
Sometimes I carry a Peacemaker clone, single action (that means that you have to cock it each time you fire) and should be carried with 5 rounds. If I am attacked by one person that should be pleanty. However sometimes I carry a double action (that means all you have to do is pull the trigger for each shot) with a ten rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber for a total of 11. If there are more than one attacker it is better.
Tell me, how scary do you find a gun in the hand of someone protecting you, how much to you want their ability to reload hampered? How many bullets do you want that person to have. The number of bullets in your gun don't really matter when you have your victims cowered in a corner and you can pick them off a leasure. Remember he had something like 3 hours, it isn't like he walked in with some syfi ray gun and vaporized everyone.
In a situation like this you would find my firearm to be the most comforting and beautiful thing in the world.

The problem is, for example in this gay place, nobody had guns, as guns is illegal in alcohol venues right? So only the bad guys will break that rule and take advantage. The good guys may not have their gun when they need it, being law abiding citizens. Or Rules abiding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I dont know what she said, she (whoever she is) might be a war hero/inelligence guy/cook like you/

most modern 9s dont carry that. Thats add on.

The only guys that carried 9s when I was in was Krepo and guys getting RIffed.

From reports I've seen the handgun was a Glock 17, which has a 17 round capacity magazine. Trends in the gun industry for the last decade or so have been toward making small concealable handguns. Only in that case are "9s" carrying less than 15-17 rounds. Or, a lot of handguns are now .40 caliber, which will hold about two rounds less than a similar 9. What you said may be construed as true if you just consider that new small concealable handguns are the only modern guns.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/top-5-handguns-bugging/

Sig P226. 15 round magazine

S&W M&P9. 17 round magazine

Glock 19. 15 round magazine

Glock 17. 17 round magazine.

Let's see...15+17+15+17= 64.

64/4 = 16.

Well, it seems BamaD was right. I thought you were an FFL.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
He also seems to be unaware that in the mid 80's the military dumped the 1911 for the 9 mm berreta. The are trying to get back to a double action .45 now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I dont know what she said, she (whoever she is) might be a war hero/inelligence guy/cook like you/

most modern 9s dont carry that. Thats add on.

The only guys that carried 9s when I was in was Krepo and guys getting RIffed.

From reports I've seen the handgun was a Glock 17, which has a 17 round capacity magazine. Trends in the gun industry for the last decade or so have been toward making small concealable handguns. Only in that case are "9s" carrying less than 15-17 rounds. Or, a lot of handguns are now .40 caliber, which will hold about two rounds less than a similar 9. What you said may be construed as true if you just consider that new small concealable handguns are the only modern guns.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/top-5-handguns-bugging/

Sig P226. 15 round magazine

S&W M&P9. 17 round magazine

Glock 19. 15 round magazine

Glock 17. 17 round magazine.

Let's see...15+17+15+17= 64.

64/4 = 16.

Well, it seems BamaD was right. I thought you were an FFL.

He also seems to be unaware that in the mid 80's the military dumped the 1911 for the 9 mm berreta. The are trying to get back to a double action .45 now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I dont know what she said, she (whoever she is) might be a war hero/inelligence guy/cook like you/

most modern 9s dont carry that. Thats add on.

The only guys that carried 9s when I was in was Krepo and guys getting RIffed.

From reports I've seen the handgun was a Glock 17, which has a 17 round capacity magazine. Trends in the gun industry for the last decade or so have been toward making small concealable handguns. Only in that case are "9s" carrying less than 15-17 rounds. Or, a lot of handguns are now .40 caliber, which will hold about two rounds less than a similar 9. What you said may be construed as true if you just consider that new small concealable handguns are the only modern guns.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/top-5-handguns-bugging/

Sig P226. 15 round magazine

S&W M&P9. 17 round magazine

Glock 19. 15 round magazine

Glock 17. 17 round magazine.

Let's see...15+17+15+17= 64.

64/4 = 16.

Well, it seems BamaD was right. I thought you were an FFL.

He also seems to be unaware that in the mid 80's the military dumped the 1911 for the 9 mm berreta. The are trying to get back to a double action .45 now.

If I had to bet, id say the Army won't go to a .45. It would be the whole FBI with a 10mm all over again. Now that women aren't excluded from combat roles their physical dimensions will have to be considered. Women won't deal well with the grip size or recoil of a .45.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

The crossbow was once called "the weapon to end all wars" because an unskilled individual could kill indiscriminately. The Church called it "a weapon hateful to God and unfit for Christians." There's clear precedent here that suggests that society should not grant the power to kill indiscriminately.

quote:
You have a disconnect from reality.
If they allow a firearm with a twenty round capacity then they clearly would have no problem with todays weapons. And you also seem to think that we are in any way subordinate to Papal law, that violates freedom of religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

The crossbow was once called "the weapon to end all wars" because an unskilled individual could kill indiscriminately. The Church called it "a weapon hateful to God and unfit for Christians." There's clear precedent here that suggests that society should not grant the power to kill indiscriminately.

quote:
You have a disconnect from reality.
If they allow a firearm with a twenty round capacity then they clearly would have no problem with todays weapons. And you also seem to think that we are in any way subordinate to Papal law, that violates freedom of religion.

And in ANY OTHER INSTANCE OTHER THAN GUN CONTROL, the idea of being governed by papal law would be anathema to those most in favor of harsher gun control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: BamaD



If he was firing full auto his firearm was illegal, any semi auto fires fast, but he wouldn't be aiming. And yes there is no reason to ban them from the citizenry. Do you realize that this is 100 year old technology?


Closer to 400 years old.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
So your point is that since there are lots of crazy people in the world who'd do this sort of thing, all of the innocent law abiding people should have the government take away their rights and control things?

I think one has to now consider. In terms of ISIS goals and lone wolves jihadhist goals. This is a super successful attack on America. Like super successful. One dude managed to wound 100 over people. Just one dude! And without blowing up himself. And out of 100, 50% were fatal. This is a highly successful operation on the bad guy's point of view.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
So your point is that since there are lots of crazy people in the world who'd do this sort of thing, all of the innocent law abiding people should have the government take away their rights and control things?

I think one has to now consider. In terms of ISIS goals and lone wolves jihadhist goals. This is a super successful attack on America. Like super successful. One dude managed to wound 100 over people. Just one dude! And without blowing up himself. And out of 100, 50% were fatal. This is a highly successful operation on the bad guy's point of view.

The LA Times is reporting the shooter used gay dating apps and had visited the bar numerous times. Apparently he also beat his (ex)wife for little to no reason but she did not file charges against him.

What if it's not an ISIS incident: what if the shooter was sexually repressed to the point where he lashed out at anyone like him?